Skip to content
Howard & Sandra Mandell Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Howard & Sandra Mandell Charitable Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$15k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$148kPhilanthropy$100kReligion$64kInternational$24kAnimals$4kArts & Culture$1kPublic Safety & Disaster$550Civil Rights$200Other$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH UNITED FUND$10,000
FREE WHEELCHAIR MISSION$5,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY21–21, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%COMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES: $5k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
WI
MI
NY
CA
DC
GA
TX
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$293k · 7 repeat orgs$38k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
17

Total granted

$293k
$38k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+39%

Still filing today

71%
53%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthAnimalsPhilanthropyHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesArts & CultureOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • JU
    JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
    8× · 2017–2025 · $90k · revenue +13%
  • LS
    LYNN SAGE BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $75k · revenue +134%
  • FW
    FREE WHEELCHAIR MISSION
    7× · 2017–2025 · $55k · revenue +88%

Funded once

  • JW
    Jewish Women International
    one grant, 2018 · $18k · revenue -19%
  • CS
    COMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +39%
  • CF
    CENTER FOR SACRED STUDIESTHE FOUNTAIN
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
University of Chicago Medical Center

Our mission at the university of chicago medicine is to provide superior health care through rigorous research, innovative education, and comprehensive care and healing. in partnership with our colleagues, we pursue life-changing…

Health
2
Loyola University of Chicago

We are chicago's jesuit, catholic university - a diverse community seeking god in all things and working to expand knowledge in the service of humanity through learning, justice, and faith.

Education
3
Greater Miami Jewish Federation Inc

The mission of the greater miami jewish federation is to mobilize human and financial resources to care for those in need, strengthen jewish life and advance the unity, values and shared purpose of the jewish people in miami, in israel and…

Philanthropy
4
International Myeloma Foundation

Dedicated to improving the quality of life of myeloma patients while working toward prevention and a cure.

Unclassified
5
Lymphoma Research Foundation

To eradicate lymphoma and serve those touched by this disease.

Health
6
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
7
Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia

The jewish federation of greater philadelphia mobilizes financial and volunteer resources to create a bright future for jewish people everywhere. the jewish federation cares for those in need, combats antisemitism and global crises, and…

Philanthropy
8
Cancer Legal Care

Cancer legal care's (clc) mission is to engage the law to resolve the complex challenges facing people and communities affected by cancer. since beginning to provide services to the minnesota cancer community on october 1, 2007, cancer…

Health
9
Bar Ilan University in Israel Inc

Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.

—
10
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o

Health
11
The Jewish Healthcare Foundation of Pittsburgh

The jewish healthcare foundation offers a unique brand of activist philanthropy to advance healthcare innovation, advocacy, collaboration, and education in the interest of better health. jhf is focused on pertinent health issues for the…

Health
12
Jewish Board of Family & Children's Services Inc

To empower new yorkers, providing integrated mental health and social services with compassion and expertise.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Naacp Legal Defense & Educ Fund Inc; the most unlike its peers is Lynn Sage Breast Cancer Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 25 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
12/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $90,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITA…JEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $10,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN…CONGREGATION KOL EMETH: $58,000 · OtherCONGREGATION KOL EMETHJewish Women International: $18,000 · OtherJewish Women InternationalFRIENDS UNITED FOR JUVENILE DIABETES RESEARCH: $10,000 · OtherFRIENDS UNITED FOR JUVENILE DIAB…CENTER FOR SACRED STUDIESTHE FOUNTAIN: $5,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCE: $5,000 · Other+8 more: $3,000 · OtherLYNN SAGE BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION: $75,000 · Housing & ShelterLYNN SAGE BREAST CANCER …FREE WHEELCHAIR MISSION: $55,000 · HealthFREE WHEELCHAIR MIS…Lewy Body Dementia Association Inc: $2,052 · Health+2 more: $500 · HealthCOMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesMICHIGAN HUMANE SOCIETY: $3,000 · AnimalsORPHANS OF THE STORM: $500 · AnimalsRAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION: $1,100 · Arts & CultureNAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC: $200 · Civil Rights
Philanthropy$100,000Other$99,000Housing & Shelter$75,000Health$57,552Human Services$5,000Animals$3,500Arts & Culture$1,100Civil Rights$200

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $90,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetLYNN SAGE BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION: $75,000 over 8y, 1.7% of budgetFREE WHEELCHAIR MISSION: $55,000 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetJewish Women International: $18,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMICHIGAN HUMANE SOCIETY: $3,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetLewy Body Dementia Association Inc: $2,052 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetRAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION: $1,100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIANS & JEWS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetORPHANS OF THE STORM: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RESEARCH: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLEMONS OF LOVE INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMATH CIRCLES OF CHICAGO: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Morgan Stanley Global…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN11× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Howard & Sandra Mandell Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Howard & Sandra Mandell Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Howard & Sandra Mandell Charitable Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Howard & Sandra Mandell Charitable Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 25 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Howard & Sandra Mandell’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home